It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The John Lear Hologram Challenge

page: 14
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by titorite
 


Actually I asked if you or any others who are convinced have seen 'raw' clips and carefulyl studied frame by frame (as in not using Windows Media Player and hitting pause) or if you're just watching these stepped on grainy youtube videos by others and etc.

Basically everything you said can be, and has been in other threads explained with optics. Media witnesses? Yeah, they're all in on it. Every single one of them. Including the people on the street corner where the engine "was placed". Tell that to the Jury. I will admit that it was interesting how there was a "haze" over many cameras, but much could still be explained as optics and sun angles etc. The inability to reproduce shots using Google Earth. Etc.



Originally posted by zorgon
So if you have another better copy I would be happy to analyse it. As it is, despite Chorlton's comments... there is NO damage to the building in that video clip and the plane is already half way in...


So where's your frame by frame bits? Make sure they're uncompressed, and from the nearest-to-source sources possible. Then we can start talking in scientific terms. It's too bad the cameras distances will only provide a certain level of detail, and because of that it's probably easier for it to give the impression you're drawing. It's not like there was 25 high definition cameras with 1000x zoom lenses all set up on tripods and etc, but everybody is willing to speak as if that's the quality of video we're working with to make such staunch claims that defy all reason and evidence such as engines on the street.

[edit on 6-10-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]




posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
It was 'Force Majeur' so I doubt the relatives can sue.


You 'doubt' it? You don't know? :puz" Did you even check?

It would be nice just once in awhile that you actually did some research before placing foot in mouth


And I suppose conveniently the flight insurance companies won't pay out either huh? Or I guess not ONE of those passengers in 4 planes took out flight insurance?

But hey that's the skeptics main tool... focus attention away from the question.

So with out the facts to back you up, your hypothesis is merely your uninformed opinion, nothing more.




posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Actually I asked if you or any others who are convinced have seen 'raw' clips and carefulyl studied frame by frame (as in not using Windows Media Player and hitting pause) or if you're just watching these stepped on grainy youtube videos by others and etc.


Well I used my graphics editor to view the frames from the only AVAILABLE footage and that was hard to find... As I said point me to the original CNN film and I will be happy to analyse it.... as I am sure many others would as well...

I am still waiting for anyone to produce these 'raw' footage.... and if you can not, how about a reasonable explanation WHY NOT? If they show nothing amiss... show me the films


I will admit that it was interesting how there was a "haze" over many cameras, but much could still be explained as optics and sun angles etc. The inability to reproduce shots using Google Earth. Etc.


So let me see if I have this straight? You believe 'we' did this, you just don't agree on the method?



So where's your frame by frame bits? Make sure they're uncompressed, and from the nearest-to-source sources possible.


I have already posted them in both threads and a link to my website... several people have already commented in both threads that this is one of the better pieces of evidense and makes them think... and I have already stated that the only footage showing this is a youtube video copy of a CNN report... and a second CNN report that shows the same plane but is chopped off before the plane hits...

As far as I have been able to find... there is no other footage...

So ball back to you.... show me the real time news footage that CNN took... then we will talk


Seems to me to be a reasonable request
i HAVE ALREADY POSTED THEM IN BOTH THREADS AND A LINK TO MY PAGE... SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY COMMENTED IN BOTH THREADS THAT THIS WAS THE BEST EVIDENSE THEY HAVE SEEN SO FAR



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Actually I asked if you or any others who are convinced have seen 'raw' clips and carefulyl studied frame by frame (as in not using Windows Media Player and hitting pause) or if you're just watching these stepped on grainy youtube videos by others and etc.


The video link I posted is not "grainy" on my screen. You may have a problem with your moniter. As for your "raw" footage I will say again, in prefect clairity so you may understand completely. On 9/11 many Americans put VHS tapes into their VCRs and hit record. My brother in-law was one of those people. I got the tape and I also had it converted to DVD formate for through examination. Now I don't know what you would use to study the frames of the footage but my windows can move forward or backwards one frame at a time without distortion.

IF you view my post I made at 2:34 pm today (the first one I posted on the page) Other thread link and follow the instructions I laid out for John Lear you will see some conclusive evidence or you will refuse to see it.


It's not like there was 25 high definition cameras all set up on tripods and etc,


Actully the american news media had quite sophisticated high definition cameras back in 2001. the WECON camera system on thier choppers are so advanced that WECON is the main imaging system the military uses to this day in thier military vehicals. I find it most amazing that for haveing such top of the line camera equipment that they got such lousy shots from time to time... But I guess not every shot can be a pulitzer. Thats what computer graphics and air brushing is for.

[edit on 6-10-2007 by titorite]



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nola213







Wow I guess one day we will have 3d TV. I guess Ralph Kramden was right all those years ago.
Interesting link thanks for posting it.





Hi Nola213


I am afraid the " rabbit hole " goes far too deeper ; the military-industrial complexes of planet earth actually owns the world and everyone living on it .( except few groups )

Here is a video of Tom Bearden , dated 1988 ; talking about the foundation technology for such a holographic show .

uk.youtube.com...

I have found the holographic theory to be a rather complicated one .






Real Time Holography , that's what Tom Bearden calls it .


[edit on 6-10-2007 by 23432]

[edit on 6-10-2007 by 23432]



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 23432
I am afraid the " rabbit hole " goes far too deeper ;
I have found the holographic theory to be a rather complicated one .


Darn Rabbits
I guess we need to bring longer ropes along on the search

Yes Tom has some interesting material on his site... Never occured to me to see what the Russians were up to re holograms

Thanks



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by titorite
The video link I posted is not "grainy" on my screen. You may have a problem with your moniter.


So you're saying that you could put that little LiveVideo SEPTCLUES video playing in its form on a big screen TV set and it wouldnt be grainy? You obviously don't have a sophisticated concept of video quality and the way each time somethings re-rendered quality is lost. Then those upload sites step on them again after you upload. Youtube has to be the worst and i regularly observe people drawing conclusions on detailed matters off of youtube posts. Kind of like VHS. I do wish somebody would post some recorded tapes from that day so i could at least get a hold of what the other channels were playing for a TV simulation effect in later projects... you should post whatever you have on bittorrent for the public historical record in any case.



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 


YOur right but now that you mention it I am not the only america with a copy of the days events Haven't other people already uploaded copies of the days events on torrent?



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:37 AM
link   
I have a question for John Lear, or for anyone else who happens to believe in Aliens.


How do you know it wasn't some Alien race that pulled this off? I mean, if you truly believe that either

a) holograms were used
b) CGI on the media
c) a mix of the two

then how do you know at this point it wasn't the Aliens? Since they would also have the Tech to pull this of?. In other words I see that we are being told it was a PSYOP by the Gov and some people seem to indicate the MEDIA and every single 'Tony' in New York with a camera was controlled, also some argue for an Energy Beam doing the Towers in etc. Aliens could fit the bill.


My whole point there is to show where this will lead. I respect the viewpoints of everyone here, but really I think we need to throw some caution to the wind. I think these theories open up a Pandora's Box.

OUR FOCUS should be on the guilty, by introducing the theories of "NO PLANES" you start to shift the focus away from the guilty and it could lead to someone believing Aliens were really the ones that pulled this off.

thnks.





[edit on 7-10-2007 by talisman]



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
How do you know it wasn't some Alien race that pulled this off?


Nope no Aliens... they had nothing to do with it... have that on good authority




posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by talisman
How do you know it wasn't some Alien race that pulled this off?


Nope no Aliens... they had nothing to do with it... have that on good authority


Did the litte grey man who lives under your bed tell you or did you simply telephone your 'secreat space station'



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
Did the litte grey man who lives under your bed tell you or did you simply telephone your 'secreat space station'


Neither of those have anything to do with the holograms nor this thread, little Troll

Perhaps you could actually try once in a while to add something constructive to a thread? Or is that too much to expect?



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Chorlton
Did the litte grey man who lives under your bed tell you or did you simply telephone your 'secreat space station'


Neither of those have anything to do with the holograms nor this thread, little Troll

Perhaps you could actually try once in a while to add something constructive to a thread? Or is that too much to expect?


Well I beg your pardon litte trollmaster in funny clothes, but you posted this.

"Nope no Aliens... they had nothing to do with it... have that on good authority "

Which had nothing to do with the thread.



[edit on 7/10/07 by Chorlton]



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Nope no Aliens... they had nothing to do with it... have that on good authority


That appears to be an unequivocal statement of fact. It seems as if there should be some kind of support for it, ???.

Funny, it seems as if when someone says, "Nope no Holograms....they had nothing....blah, blah....." Aaagghhh.....a debunking troll! You know nothing....you are uninformed....you are not open-minded......

This is such great entertainment....



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


It isn't the "debunking" that gets done. it is the snide attitude with which it is done. The snorts and chuckles that are feigned into a typeset do not go far to making people feel that you are partnering for a solution (they actually put you at odds with folks).

Try making a "debunking" post that doesn't involve statements such as "This is great entertainment" or other such tactics of humiliation. Then you will find that people are more amenable.



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by MrPenny
 


It isn't the "debunking" that gets done. it is the snide attitude with which it is done.

And you dont think some of zorgons replies are snide?



The snorts and chuckles that are feigned into a typeset do not go far to making people feel that you are partnering for a solution (they actually put you at odds with folks).

See above.


Try making a "debunking" post that doesn't involve statements such as "This is great entertainment" or other such tactics of humiliation. Then you will find that people are more amenable.


Try making a post containg some actual evidence rather than sleight of hand tactics and totally unrelated stuff, then we might be able to 'debunk' instead of rolling around on the floor with laughter



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 02:24 PM
link   
That's enough...

We are going to get back to on topic, civil discussion, sans personal attacks, finger pointing, or other disruptive content.

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Posting Conduct… Play The Ball – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Post On Topic – Please Review This Link.

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Chorlton, Mr. Penney, et-al:

What is it about these threads that you can't ignore them? It's obvious you have nothing but contempt for those who enjoy the speculation and discussion, the topics themselves and the very ideas behind them.

I can't figure out why you keep participating in them.


Springer...



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


O.K. I'll leave and never come back. Somehow I missed the one-way nature of the forums, I thought they were for two way discussion, and I can't seem to get a solid handle on the moving target of "decorum".

And please, I've said it before and I've seen moderators berate others for failing to use screen names properly.......its "MrPenny", not "Mr. Penny".

Toodles,



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

This is such great entertainment....


Ya, so much better than watching the hometown football team get their ass kicked on television. Both these threads make me laugh out loud at least once a day.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join